### 8

- H

- i APPENDIX 8

- H. BASE CASE DISTRIBUTI ON OF EFFICIENCY LEV ELS

TABLE OF CO NTENTS

8

- H.1 INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ . 8

- H

- 1

8

- H.2 ESTIMATE OF 2014 EFF ICIENCY DISTRIBUTION S BY EQUIPMENT

CLASS AND EFFICIENCY LEVEL

................................ ................................ .... 8

- H

- 1

8

- H.3 PROJECTED MARKET SHA RES FROM 2014 TO 201 9 AND BEYOND

....... 8

- H

- 4

8

- H.3.1 Condensing Unit Market Share

................................ ................................ .............. 8

- H

- 4

8

- H.4 ESTIMATE OF 2019 EFF ICIENCY DISTRIBUTION S BY EQUIPMENT

CLASS

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 8

- H

- 8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 8

- H.1.1 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 2014 by

Efficiency, Natural Draft Boilers

................................ ............................... 8

- H

- 2

Table 8

- H.1.2 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 2014 by

Efficiency, Mechanical Draft Boilers

................................ ........................ 8

- H

- 2

Table 8

- H.1.3 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 2014 by

Efficiency Level, Natural Draft Boilers

................................ ..................... 8

- H

- 3

Table 8

- H.1.4 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 2014 by

Efficiency Level, Mechanical Draft Boilers

................................ .............. 8

- H

- 4

Table 8

- H.1.1 Base Case Distribution of Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency in 2019

................................ ................................ ...................... 8

- H

- 8

Table 8

- H.1.2 Base Case Distribution of Mechanical Draft Commercial Packaged

Boiler Efficiency in 2019

................................ ................................ ........... 8

- H

- 9

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 8

- H.1.2 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers ≥300,000 Btu/hr and ≤2,500,000 Btu/hr

....................... 8

- H

- 6

Figure 8

- H.1.3 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers >2,500,000 Btu/hr

................................ ......................... 8

- H

- 6

Figure 8

- H.1.4 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers ≥300,000 Btu/hr and ≤2,500,000 Btu/hr

....................... 8

- H

- 7

Figure 8

- H.1.5 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers >2,500,000 Btu/hr

................................ ......................... 8

- H

- 7

### 8

- H

- 1 APPENDIX 8

- H. BASE CASE DISTRIBUTI ON OF EFFICIENCY LEV ELS

8

- H.1 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Department of Energy ( DOE) derive s base case efficiency distributions of

efficiency levels by equipment class for commercial packaged boilers , which recognizes that

commercial consumer s already purchasing equipment at efficiencies greater than or equal to a

prospective standard level are n ot impacted by the standard. This appendix describes the

distributions.

DOE did not have access to sales data describing the actual distribution of efficiencies in

current sales, nor was such information provided by industry for this rulemaking. As a

consequence, DOE developed estimates of the distribution of efficiency levels for each of the 16

commercial packaged boiler equipment classes. The distributions are based on the Air

Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute ( AHRI ) Directory of Certified Product

Performance obtained on the following dates: 1



### • March 1, 2007

• March 3, 2008

• January 30, 2009

• January 11, 2011

• January 3, 2012

• April 1, 2013

• May 26, 2014

The AHRI Directory provides a review of efficiencies o n the market for each equipment

class. Note that the database from 2010 i s not used.

8

- H.2 ESTIMATE OF 2014 EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUT IONS BY

EQUIPMENT CLASS AND EFFICIENCY LEVEL

DOE develop s data about the share of models in each equipment class which are of the

different designs based on the May 26, 2014

, AHRI certification shown in Table 8

- H.1.1 and

Table 8

- H.1.2

.

### 8

- H

- 2 Table 8

- H.1.1 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler M odels in 2014 by Efficiency,

Natural Draft Boilers

Efficiency SGMDHW LGMDHW SOMDHW LOMDHW SGMDST LGMDST SOMDST LOMDST

77 74.2% 33.8%

78 6.1% 62.2%

79 19.0%

80 22.6% 0.6% 2.7%

81 30.3% 1.4% 3.2%

82 40.6% 56.3% 56.0% 41.9%

83 5.2% 25.0% 12.0% 38.7%

84 1.3% 18.8% 18.0% 100.0%

85 6.0% 16.1%

86 6.0%

87 2.0%

88

89



### Table 8

- H.1.2 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 2014 by Efficiency,

Mechanical Draft Boilers

Efficiency SGMDHW LGMDHW SOMDHW LOMDHW SGMDST LGMDST SOMDST LOMDST

79 3.3% 5.5%

80 5.3% 49.5% 38.4%

81 6.8% 27.5% 4.1% 1.4% 6.9%

82 4.0% 3.4% 22.4% 7.7% 13.7% 32.9% 25.9%

83 5.3% 23.0% 21.4% 12.1% 37.0% 40.0% 19.0%

84 7.7% 11.2% 10.2% 22.4% 1.4% 12.9%

85 19.6% 18.0% 18.4% 14.5% 12.9% 44.8%

86 3.8% 2.2% 13.3% 38.2% 1.7%

87 3.7% 6.2% 8.2% 6.6% 1.7%

88 0.2% 5.1% 11.8%

89 0.5% 0.6% 2.6%

90 0.7%

91 0.5%

92 5.1% 5.1%

93 8.1% 10.1%

94 11.0% 15.7%

95 12.9% 1.7% 1.3%

96 2.6% 2.2% 1.0% 1.3%

97 1.5% 0.6% 1.3%

98 0.5%

99 0.1%



### To create the fractions of boilers by efficiency levels, DOE use s the following criteria to

process the AHRI model directory data:

1. Only boilers that me e t the current standard are included.

### 8

- H

- 3 2. Reported efficiency is rounded down to the nearest whole number. For example, 92

percent represents reported efficiencies from 92 percent to 93 percent, including 92

percent and excluding 93 percent.

3. Rounded efficiency from Step 2 is rounded to the nearest considered efficiency level.

4. Boilers that are listed as both hot water and steam are included in both the hot water and

steam analysis.

Table 8

- H.1.3 and Table 8

- H.1.4 show the adjusted fractions of commercial packaged

boiler models by efficiency level in 2014. The adjusted fractions are equivalent to the assumed

distribution of commercial p ackaged boiler efficiency in 2014.

Table 8

- H.1.3 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 201 4 by Efficiency

Level , Natural Draft Boilers

Efficiency SGNDHW LGNDHW SONDHW LONDHW SGNDST LGNDST SONDST LONDST

77 74.2% 33.8%

78 15.6% 62.2%

79 1.4%

80 22.6% 10.1%

81 30.3% 2.7% 3.8%

82 45.8% 56.3% 56.0% 50.0%

83 25.0% 21.0% 46.2%

84 18.8% 100.0%

85 1.3% 18.0%

86

87 5.0%

### 8

- H

- 4 Table 8

- H.1.4 Fraction of Commercial Packaged Boiler Models in 201 4 by Efficiency

Level, Mechanical Draft Boilers

Efficiency SGMDHW LGMDHW SOMDHW LOMDHW SGMDST LGMDST SOMDST LOMDST

79 3.3% 5.6%

80 12.1% 49.5% 43.1%

81 31.3% 17.9% 19.8%

82 14.9% 22.4%

83 13.2% 21.4% 15.9% 51.4% 56.4% 31.9%

84 31.7% 28.6% 29.6% 19.3%

85 25.3%

86 18.0% 48.7% 6.4% 48.3%

87 6.3% 26.5%

88 17.8%

89

90

91

92 14.4%

93

94 32.6%

95 26.6%

96

97 2.8% 3.9%

98 2.1% 1.0%



### 8

- H.3 PROJECTED MARKET SHA RES FROM 2014 TO 201 9 AND

BEYOND

8

- H.3.1 Condensing Unit Market Share

DOE assume s that the condensing boiler market share will increase linearly by equipment

class from 2014 to 2049. DOE determines t he linear fit parameters based on the percent of

condensing models in the AHRI Directory from 2007 to 2014, excluding 2010.

From 2007 to 2009, the percent of condensing mechanical draft gas

- fired hot water

commercial packaged boiler s increased by approxi mately 5

- percent per year for small boilers

and on average 1.1

- percent per year for large boilers. From 2011 to 2014, the growth rate slows

down to an average of approximately 1.2

- percent per year for small boilers and on average 0.7

percent per year for l arge boilers. DOE assume s that the growth rate from 2011 to 2014 is

representative of the future market share of condensing mechanical draft gas

- fired h ot w ater

commercial packaged boilers, and uses this growth rate from 2015 to 2049.

From 2007 to 2009, t here were no condensing mechanical draft oil

- fired hot water

commercial packaged boiler s. From 2011 to 2013, the market share of condensing models

increased. In 2014 there is a sharp decrease in the condensing market share. DOE believes that

the decrease i s due to one or more manufacturers discontinuing a certified product line and

subsequently coming out with a new product line that is not yet certified but likely will be. For

### 8

- H

- 5 this reason, DOE has decided to disregard the data from 2014. DOE assume s that t he growth rate

from 2009 and 2011 to 2013 is representative of the future market share of mechanical draft oil

fired hot water commercial packaged boiler s, and use s this growth rate from 2015 to 2049.

Figure 8

- H.1.2 through Figure 8

- H.1.5 plot the historical data and projections of market

share of condensing units for mechanical draft gas

- fired hot water commercial packaged boiler s ≥300,000 Btu/hr and ≤2,500,000 Btu/hr, mechanical draft gas

- fired hot water commercial

packaged boiler s >2,500,000 Btu/hr, mechanical draft oil

- fired hot water commercial packaged

boiler s ≥30 0,000 Btu/hr and ≤2,500,000 Btu/hr, and mechanical draft oil

- fired hot water

commercial packaged boiler s >2,500,000 Btu/hr, r espectively. See appendix 7

- B for the

derivation of historical fraction of condensing boilers.

### 8

- H

- 6 Figure 8

- H.1.2 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boiler s ≥300,000 Btu/hr and ≤2,500,000 Btu/hr

Figure 8

- H.1.3 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Co mmercial

Packaged Boiler s >2,500,000 Btu/hr 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2007 2017 2027 2037 2047Percent of Models that areCondensing

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2007 2017 2027 2037 2047Percent of Models that areCondensing

### 8

- H

- 7 Figure 8

- H.1.4 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boiler s ≥300,000 Btu/hr and ≤2,500,000 Btu/hr

Figure 8

- H.1.5 Historical Data and Projection of Base

- Case Market Share for

Condensing Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boiler s >2,500,000 Btu/hr

DOE assume s that the market shares of condensing steam boilers and condensing natural

draft boilers will be negligible during the p eriod of analysis (2019

- 2049). 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2007 2017 2027 2037 2047Percent of Models that areCondensing

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2007 2017 2027 2037 2047Percent of Models that areCondensing

### 8

- H

- 8 8

- H.4 ESTIMATE OF 2019 EFF ICIENCY DISTRIBUTION S BY

EQUIPMENT CLASS

DOE use s the efficiency distribution in 2009 and 2011

‒ 2014

, as well as the projections of

the base

- case market share of condensing boilers from 2014 to 2019

, to project the efficiency

distributions in 2019. The base

- case distributions of condensing gas

- fired and oil

- fired

mechanical draft hot water boilers in 2019 are calculated by multiplying the market shares in

2014 with a factor that considers the increase in market share of condensing boilers from 2014

-

2019. The derivation of this factor is described in s ection 8

- H.3.1 , and is different for fuel oil and

gas. The non

- condensing gas

- fired and oil

- fired mechanical draft hot water boilers will cover the

rest of the market, with their shares kept in the same pro portional relationship as the average

market shares from 2009 and 2011

- 2014. For all steam boiler equipment classes and all natural

draft equipment classes, DOE assume s that the base case efficiency distribution in 2015 was the

average of the distribution from 2009 and 2011

- 2014. DOE assume s that the distribution

remained constant from 2015

- 2019. The calculated base case distribution of commercial

packaged boiler efficiency in 2019 is summarized in Table 8

- H.1.1 and Table 8

- H.1.2

Table 8

- H.1.1 Base Case Distribution of Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency in 2019

Efficiency SGNDHW LGNDHW SONDHW LONDHW SGNDST LGNDST SONDST LONDST

77 71.7% 21.1%

78 17.1% 44.3%

79 21.8%

80 16.0% 11.3%

81 16.5% 12.8% 48.1%

82 62.4% 78.7% 55.4% 41.1%

83 18.5% 20.3% 10.8%

84 2.8% 51.3%

85 5.1% 17.9% 29.5%

86 19.2%

87 6.4%

### 8

- H

- 9 Table 8

- H.1.2 Base Case Distribution of Mechanical Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency in 2019

Efficiency SGMDHW LGMDHW SOMDHW LOMDHW SGMDST LGMDST SOMDST LOMDST

79 18.6% 20.1%

80 11.8% 46.9% 42.8%

81 23.3% 31.6% 44.8%

82 16.8% 27.9%

83 12.4% 25.4% 11.2% 37.1% 53.8% 31.4%

84 30.4% 15.4% 31.3% 9.7%

85 21.7%

86 13.0% 47.7% 4.8% 23.9%

87 6.2% 22.2%

88 14.8%

89

90

91

92 15.6%

93

94 36.1%

95 26.1%

96

97 3.7% 6.2%

98 6.1% 9.0%

### 8

- H

- 10 REFERENCES

1. Air Conditioning Heating and Refrigeration Institute, Consumer's Directory of Certified

Efficiency Ratings for Heating and Water Heating Equipment (AHRI Directory

September 2013), 2013. (Posted September 2013) (Last accessed September, 2013.)

< http://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx >